Maps that should not be reviewed

[XepptizZ]

I'll just have to agree with arcadia. Although I believe some things shouldn't even be shared, but there's no real map from what you can truely say, "that shouldn't be here!".

I remember an awesome map with very skilled techniques wich was left unreviewed, maybe i can resurrect it if it's not reviewed yet. I was planning on reviewing it myselfe when ever I'd want to become a reviewer, but mapping seems to be more fun and more time consuming.

 

[happydeadguy]

I agree , DM-Deck16-ultamegareeeedemerme was a joke or something , the 'guy' in sort of , might be around 11 yrs old .

Actually (i made the map) i'm 13 and I am serious!

 

[Xiphon]

Uh, seiriously, how could you make a map like that sierious?

 

[happydeadguy]

I'm gay...

 

[XepptizZ]

I find that very pathetic and very immature, but whatever.

It's like

I'm a gay NooB wannabe mapper...

I read somewhere you meanted as a joke, weird to get mad over a joke. Anyways, I hope you get better and go on with mappin.

 

[Kantham]

Hi , my name is Andrei , and im 13 , i want to make friendz but i suck at everything , so i just do stupid remarks and upload somme stupid sh!ts

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

EDIT:
just try to ban me... I'll just create a new user acount under a diffrent name...

http://nalicity.beyondunreal.com/map_hub.php?mid=8263

 

[Manticore]

Trolltime folks....

1.3 is a difficult age.....

 

[Symbolikal]

I'm the same age and we aren't all immature. Most of us are, but the few of us that aren't, are very nice people. Can't we just do what Luquado did again? Or a Newgrounds system type thing where you can vote for content to be removed, and say for example, something (like that piece of edited crap) got five delete votes, it would be deleted from the site. There would be save votes to help save a map if it (the system) was getting abused, and would remove one delete vote.

 

[XepptizZ]

Heh, I never said that it was age related Symbolikal. The bad score system system can easeli be corrupted by making various accounts. It doesn't sound like a good thing to me, but we definitly could use such a system.

 

[Hourences]

You cant do that, people will abuse the system and it might end up in a popularity contest and mapping is not about that. Nor can you just delete all maps that suck, its bound to give lots of flaming, crap, frustration, discussions etc. Where do you draw the line ? What type of level would be good enough to stay and what bad enough to go ? What with unreviewed maps ? Why do those maps deserve to stay while possibly slightly better yet reviewed maps are deleted ? Etc
Everyone can upload their level and it should stay like that

 

[Kantham]

I still think that all maps that are uploaded to NC3 with just 2 new things in it or VCTF conversion should be totaly removed . Mapping never end , we all got ideas , we all need to do them , and never take maps that are already done.

 

[Manticore]

Reviews

You cant do that, people will abuse the system and it might end up in a popularity contest and mapping is not about that. Nor can you just delete all maps that suck, its bound to give lots of flaming, crap, frustration, discussions etc. Where do you draw the line ? What type of level would be good enough to stay and what bad enough to go ? What with unreviewed maps ? Why do those maps deserve to stay while possibly slightly better yet reviewed maps are deleted ? Etc
Everyone can upload their level and it should stay like that

I still think the idea of blocking reviews on trolling mappers is the best way to go....:tup:

....and continuing to block user comments in those situations so that their dumb friends can't encourage them. Usually it all ends up in lot of counter-troll actions and then the usual battle-of-the-flambes....

 

[ArcadiaVincennes]

Thank you to whomever did the dissappearing trick. I appreciate it.

I was thinking... what do you guys think about this...

If I pick a map to review, and it ends up being a 3 or less, how about I do not review it, remove it from the review queue, and post a comment saying the map was less than a three and there is no review with maybe a detail or two?

This would prevent time wasted on a bad map, quicker review queue reduction, the author still gets some form of input, and that would be that.

Yay/Nay?

What do ya'll think?

 

[Manticore]

Hmmmmmmmm.....

.............the author still gets some form of input, and that would be that.

Considering how sensitive some mappers are about comments from users (and I'm not talking about the Hourences incident; rather some less well known part-timers) I don't know if this will be received very well coming from reviewers.

You may end up with a situation where you have to provide a suicide watch for mappers and/or get someone else to go out and start your car for you in the mornings.

People haven't been very good around here at times about receiving constructive criticism or people expounding their opinions. Differences of opinion around here seem to end up in "la guerre de flambe".

It may be more relevent to hear what other reviewers think......... because that's just my two cents worth and I'm not a reviewer.

 

[Nahand]

... it's tricky Arcadia. On one side, all content should be reviewed so that anybody downloading knows what its getting, for other, i agree with the no-waste-time-on-crap. The mid-value seems to be the answer (like most of the times). Sometimes, maps are so ****ty they deserve nothing but the "trash-can-review"; on the other end, there's those 3 or less scored maps that somewhat show that the mapper is trying to map and improving would come with time, and for these last, a [not-benevolent but] truefully small review would do the trick...

... don't go for schemes, review *each* map accordingly...

 

[ArcadiaVincennes]

You both have good points - it's that tricky middle ground I was trying to reach. I'll take your suggestions into account when I review. Thanks for the thoughts.

 

[Manticore]

->

I suppose it comes down to what's fair. Some mappers may genuinely want their stuff reviewed (even though the map has the potential of being good, bad or indifferent). These people will usually take a negative review or comment on the chin; at least this shows some maturity.

Some mappers just aren't going to accept anything which isn't a glowing review (even though the map has the potential of being good, bad or indifferent). This is a pretty unhealthy attitude for anyone to have if their intention is to put stuff into the public domain because there is always the potential for someone to not like your work and it really doesn't take into account the fact that opinions will vary.

And then you have the trolling spam-mappers who really deserve to be sidelined somehow as long as you can be assured that this will help to curb their trolling behaviour.

 

[Defeat]

Some people like constructive criticism, like me for example. I try to give other some fair criticism too, I don't flame people if they do 1 thing wrong.

 

[Kantham]

Yo , Welcome to nalicity Defeat , enjoy your stay , and i hope i could download some of your good work someday.

 

[:[lol]:Squid75]

Same Here

Some people like constructive criticism, like me for example. I try to give other some fair criticism too, I don't flame people if they do 1 thing wrong.

I agree. (BTW first time posting). I do have a question about having a map reviewed. Should I select a specific reviewer to review my map or does "any" actually work. I have requested a review of my maps, but never have I recieved one. Is this because my maps are a waste of time? I could really use the critisism. I know I map for snipers, but I don't think that just because they are for snipers, they are shuned for that reason. There are many sniper servers and pleanty of gamers that play this style. In my opinion, snipers actually spend more time looking at geometry, specially at long distance, and truelly can apretiate bigger maps, when done correctly.

Just my 2 cents.
Thanx for reading
Mike
:[lol]:Squid75